skirtcafe.org

Skirt Cafe is an on-line community dedicated to exploring, promoting and advocating skirts and kilts as a fashion choice for men, formerly known as men in skirts. We do this in the context of men's fashion freedom --- an expansion of choices beyond those commonly available for men to include kilts, skirts and other garments. We recognize a diversity of styles our members feel comfortable wearing, and do not exclude any potential choices. Continuing dialog on gender is encouraged in the context of fashion freedom for men. See here for more details.

moonshadow wrote:I couldn't read much on the aliceholic website. I did view a few photographs, and to me, it seems like something more along the lines of "sissy". Lots of lace, pinks, and whites.

That latter bit would be an aesthetic known as "Lolita" which has a bit of an obsession with "cute". Originating in Japan, there are several sub-genres, but most are broadly recognisable as a single family.

Neo-Victorian and sissy are definitely two different styles, at least in my judgement.

Back to the title of the thread. I suppose that a lot of women's fashion could be classed as goofy in that the method seems to be to take a basic item and make a change to make that item different, if not unique, in order to sell more, to establish a fashion or trend. The fashion shows are just at the extreme of that. Waterfall skirts and tops, add lace here and there, introduce cutouts in various places. Remember the jeans with transparent patches on the rear, exposing the bum? Even skirts follow a cycle of sorts with hemlines. Then there were lately the wrap around skirts with the front panel slightly dropped. I could go on. Cold shoulder just follows that trend. Not something I would wear even in warm weather - if it's hot enough I go for camisoles, short sleeves, T-shirts, or vests. I even have a black see-through shirt with flared sleeves that I have worn on holiday.

I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.

moonshadow wrote:...Take this for example, I believe this is a female. At any rate, this person could never be accused of being boring, and certainly has her own style without a doubt!...

This is nothing new; it's Steampunk.

Not your everyday fashion, though, and I bet she's having fun with it.

Firstly, even with the trousers, I have to say that I love her wardrobe. I would wear a lot of it.

I have been doing a bit of research and, according to her blog, it is Ouji (Prince in Japanese) style, which she describes as the brother to Lolita. She tells us that Ouji has three essential sub-genres, sweet, classic and Gothic..... you can read the rest here: https://kira-ouji.tumblr.com/

A further note.... although I like the outfits, this is perhaps sadly another case of men's fashion is able to transcend gender boundaries, where women's fashion is not. Although there are those out there that do wear it, how do the general populous consider Lolita men? (Incidentally, I found out this can also be referred to as Brolita!!! Ugh!)

SkirtsDad wrote:Firstly, even with the trousers, I have to say that I love her wardrobe. I would wear a lot of it.

I absolutely would.

I have been doing a bit of research and, according to her blog, it is Ouji (Prince in Japanese) style [...]

This may be a parallel to what's also known as "Aristocrat". (The problem with many of these genres and sub-genres coming out of Japan is that there are so many of them it's hard to keep 'em straight.)

Edit: Upon reading something about it, Ouji isn't Aristocrat at all, but rather closer to "youth aristocrat" in I suspect roughly the way that "Little Lord Fauntleroy" was a child (parody?) of his father's generation. I'll be open and honest here: I just don't understand the obsession with childhood that so many folks seem to have. I'm very glad that phase of my life is safely behind me. Gone are the notions of "cute" and being a parody of one's elders. One especially good thing in my case is that my skirts have forced me to tame my movements so they're now fluid and graceful (which they weren't right up through my 20s and early 30s). Good riddance.

A further note.... although I like the outfits, this is perhaps sadly another case of men's fashion is able to transcend gender boundaries, where women's fashion is not. Although there are those out there that do wear it, how do the general populous consider Lolita men? (Incidentally, I found out this can also be referred to as Brolita!!! Ugh!)

Agreed on the "Ugh!" comment.

The big problem with Lolita, as I see it, is that it's fairly heavily hinged on "cute" and most guys simply aren't programmed to "get" cute -- certainly in the sort of abstract way that might allow them to grab pieces of it for themselves. So, it pretty much remains the province of women.

Menswear styles, on the other hand, can go from drab and utilitarian to very lavish. The former is largely where we are in the West today, with much of it verging on grunge (or, as my late ex- called my wardrobe when we first met, "dumpster chic"). The latter can take a lot of work to put together cogently, and can take some skill in keeping it clean and undamaged (e.g. frilly lace cuffs an collars are great things, but do not go well with high-speed machinery or general dirt (think grease, which partly makes high-speed machinery high-speed instead of no-speed). My shirts with lace ruffles at the cuffs look great (and work well) if I have a sword in my hand -- not so well with a semi-automatic pistol, if you get my drift (I've not tried the experiment and won't as I don't want to damage anything an the result would be an instant jam). As another example, I would not like to experience getting a lace jabot hung up in a car-engine's fan-belt.

Grok wrote:There are some web sites selling steampunk outfits. Of course, the ones intended for men are a bit dull.

True enough, but the component pieces are mostly there and it's up to the individual to use a bit of creativity in putting something together if one wants to stand apart from the herd. That said, anything even remotely Victorian- or Edwardian- era is going to be head and shoulders about modern dreck in terms of elegance.

Sinned wrote:Back to the title of the thread. I suppose that a lot of women's fashion could be classed as goofy in that the method seems to be to take a basic item and make a change to make that item different, if not unique, in order to sell more, to establish a fashion or trend. The fashion shows are just at the extreme of that. Waterfall skirts and tops, add lace here and there, introduce cutouts in various places. Remember the jeans with transparent patches on the rear, exposing the bum? Even skirts follow a cycle of sorts with hemlines. Then there were lately the wrap around skirts with the front panel slightly dropped. I could go on. Cold shoulder just follows that trend. Not something I would wear even in warm weather - if it's hot enough I go for camisoles, short sleeves, T-shirts, or vests. I even have a black see-through shirt with flared sleeves that I have worn on holiday.

Yep, that seems the point of "goofy" fashion: different or unique just to sell more. In womens wear it isn't always just to peek-a-boo more skin, but that is a frequent theme.

I'm totally with you on warm weather tops. Womens tops include things like sleeveless blouses that are nicely cut and don't just look like a shirt with sleeves torn off by a farming accident. I wear a lot of sleeveless shirts in the hot months and until I had the courage to actually shop in womens wear stores, I just lopped the sleeves off old shirts. Now I have discovered camis too, and am blown away by that dimension of freedom and access to air on my body. Superior to mens tank tops by far.

I have the same problem with camis that women have - the straps tending to go walkabout off the shoulders and down the arms! I have also find that there are two types of camis - those with fixed length straps and those with a little adjuster toggle on them. I only buy those with the adjuster as I can shorten the straps to fit better and hence they are less likely to want to migrate. But yes they are cut better, feel a lot softer and even when worn on their own I don't feel any hesitancy about them. Interestingly MOH tolerates them even though they could be be in the same category of female attire as skirts - in other words - not.

I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.

When I first saw the picture, I thought "Count Dracula" or "Dr. Who".In any case, the outfit looks fantastic Love the colors I can't tell if the model is wearing Tr**sers or a long flowing skirt.Doesn't matter, it still looks great

JeffB1959 wrote:I've had a change of heart. Suddenly, I wouldn't at all mind giving a "cold shoulder" dress a try. I think I could make that work.

Well, folks, as promised, here I am in a cold shoulder dress that came from JCPenney. It felt a tad odd at first, but I got used to the dress and enjoyed wearing it on an outing today to the Philadelphia Art Museum. What do you think?

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.